So I'm reading the Mitchell Report and thus far I am largely unimpressed.  Most of the details on this report consist of anecdotal "evidence"... not even circumstantial.   I really hoped this report would come out and we would know who the cheaters were and who we should scorn beyond Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi and scrubs such as Jason Grimsley...

Instead we have two former trainers for New York who have named names and a few other individuals who 'name names' ... Cases like Fernando Vina who apparently was dumb enough to write checks.... I can accept that.... But most of this names names without anything to back it up... Instead, now... there are more questions... Whoever thought this list would have good citizens such as Andy Pettite? 

The following teams had the most past/current players mentioned (regardless of how long they were with the team). 

Team	Total
Yankees	22
Orioles	18
Angels	16
Mets	15
Dodgers	15
Rangers	15

Now maybe, the Red Sox just didn't have an enhancement drug problem and maybe the fact that George Mitchell is a Director of the Boston Red Sox has absolutely nothing to do with it.... Right?



I hate to sound so cynical but this report is an absolute waste of time.... Bud Selig's reaction is also a load of crap... The report even alludes to the thought that MLB knew before they acted and Selig continues to acted astonished, making empty promises of action.   At this point, Major League Baseball needs to stop acting like a surprised parent and establish proper rules and boundaries to adhere to from here on forward.  It is now apparent to me that we're never going to get anything that resembles the truth... It is now obvious that facts are out of the question... We will not get them. 

The coasts were targeted, NY, Baltimore, Los Angeles... 4 of the 6 top teams came from the two major coastal hubs of the United States, Baltimore just happens to be in George Mitchell's backyard (Washington D.C.) and Texas? Mitchell's a Democrat... Any coincidence that Texas just happens to be the team that our ex-drug using current president used to own?  I think not! 

Again... I am very very disappointed by the lack of evidence, the proliferation of anecdotal evidence and the narrow (and potentially biased)  focus found in this report.  What recourse do the innocent have in the court of public opinion?  I would venture that the answer is "none". 

What do you think?